Tools
Search
Blog // Startups
Dave Walters

Dave Walters

Website URL: http://about.me/davewalters E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Apple notoriously ignores the tech blogosphere when it comes to product criticisms. Steve simply responds in a statement with something as crazy as ‘you’re holding it wrong’. Well a funny thing happened this week: the grandfather of product reviews is about to take ol’ Steve Jobs out to the woodshed. And this ain’t the friendly controlled-leak relationships with the New York Times or Wall Street Journal – this is white lab coat guys with solid test plans calling the Apple baby ugly. And it’s going to sting…

The bottom line is Apple has themselves a big-ass PR problem along with what’s probably an engineering defect. For a brand that relies on terms like ‘magic’ to describe their products, it’s a big deal when they don’t work. I mean, c’mon, the product labs guys at Consumer Reports just gave the device the highest rating among smartphones (higher than the HTC EVO 4G), but refused to recommend it due to antenna issues. They told readers to put DUCT TAPE on the phone to make it work! All the 720p video, double cameras and unified inboxes can’t make up for two words: Not Recommended.

So how did the golden child get here? How did Steve’s magic band of product ninjas ship something that actually has a flaw? All good questions given Apple’s been on a continuous tear for 4-5 years in the product management arena. Fanboys haven’t been able to stop themselves from flocking to products as radically different as the iPad, or something as bland as a new aluminum case on an iMac. The answer is simple: their hyper secrecy. If less than 25 people can be trusted to test a product isn’t it amazing that more stuff hasn’t blown up in their face? I’m sure every tester loved the improved signal strength, someone just forgot to palm it in their left hand.

But the good news is this is fixable. This is a moment of monstrous PR opportunity for Steve and gang. Stop selling a $29 bumper as a solution, and start giving it away immediately. Or if Ive and the product design guys have as much influence as I imagine they might, go deep and recall every phone for some crazy polyurethane coating fix. Or if there’s a software fix, kick it out already. The bottom line is Apple’s stellar reputation is at stake – a reputation Steve has fought tooth-and-nail to resurrect. Now’s not the time to let arrogance get in the way of pleasing customers.

Even the best kids need discipline sometimes. Let’s face it, Apple has become unchecked – even if they have built the most amazing phone in the history of phones. I, for one, am glad that Consumer Reports stepped in to call a spade a spade. Fix it, and all is right with the world again.

Thanks old school media.

You know those Fidelity commercials that show your own green line – your personalized path to financial freedom? Well guess what, there’s a tech startup equivalent of that green line if you get going quickly. The conditions are looking ideal for a number of reasons, including big money flowing out of Google and a smart little tax credit in Georgia. Let me explain...

There’s stunning news out of social gaming behemoth Zynga this week that they’ve now raised in excess of $340M in venture funding – including a ‘secret’ $100M from Google, who they’re building games for. That’s huge money by any measure, but the intriguing part is Zynga is on an absolute tear revenue-wise as well. According to a TechCrunch article over the weekend, sources are reporting Zynga’s first-half 2010 revenue at $350M, with a 2011 target in excess of $1B. At a reported 50% profitability, that’s better than having 10 ATMs in your kitchen. Those are monstrous numbers, and raise an interesting question: what’s all the cash for? As you might guess, rumors are circulating around M&A activity. And of course a huge mountain of cash can be very strategic in defending your top-of-the-hill position (witness Apple’s Lala deal). So what does all this mean to Georgia entrepreneurs? It’s simple: go build a gaming company!

Let’s get specific on how to do this – with the full recognition we have all the pieces right here in town. There are three key roles needed to create a winning game company: an amazing storyteller (who can also pitch), a world-class digital artist who can give strong visual style to characters, and a hardcore engineer to architect and build the system. And you guessed it: between the student and alumni groups at Savannah College of Art & Design, Georgia Tech, Kennesaw State and Georgia State all the pieces are right here. It’s just a matter of putting together the team.

And if you can get going, there’s some serious tax credit goodness to help you along. The Georgia Entertainment Industry Investment Act was signed into law in 2008 and provides for a 30% across-the-board tax credit for any company who spends more than $500,000 in the state. And when you find yourself in the money-raising process, definitely include that number in your financial projections as free money is the best money. And don’t underestimate an angel basing a decision on the fact Georgia is a non-equity co-investor.

The other great news is you’ll have a decent-sized community to jump into – over 60 companies employ more than 1,600 people in the state according to Georgia.org. You can see the entire interactive brochure on the Gwinnett Chamber’s Economic Development site. You don’t hear much about the players beyond Chris Klaus’ self-funded Kaneva and Xeko (the former Elf Island), but you will notice all the big colleges and universities listed which sport more than 2,000 students in interactive design or full-on videogame development programs across the state right now. Make no mistake; this field is going to get more crowded very quickly.

So what to build? It should go without saying, but a FarmVille or Mafia Wars knock-off is out of the question. Imagine something highly social that delivers lots of ‘experience points’ for everyday tasks. Develop across social media and mobile platforms – exclusivity does nothing but limit your number of players. And create healthy competition among real-life peer groups to feed on the core human desire to compete and win versus one’s friends. Study Jesse Schnell's video below, and consume it multiple times in its long form. And consider the positive elements of game creation by listening to Jane McGonigal’s TEDTalk. Build something so radical that Zynga can’t ignore the rabid fan base around your game – even if it’s not bigger than all of Twitter (which FarmVille is).

The pieces are all out there – most in a dorm room or coffee shop within five miles of your house or apartment.  There are lots of variables stacked in your favor, but success requires the heart of an entrepreneur and the vision of an oracle. But there’s one pretty exit if you get it right. In fact, if you build the next hot multiplayer, socially aware game, I’ll personally give you 250,000 points when Zynga closes the deal (no cash value).

Startups And Baseball: For The Love Of The Game

Monday, 12 July 2010 18:32 Published in Startups

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the state of entrepreneurs. With funding squeaky tight and corporate buyers locked-down, I wonder how many net new entrepreneurs are created in the South on a monthly basis? And I’m not talking people between jobs, I mean real-deal entrepreneurs. Who is giving up the corporate grind or choosing not to even enter that fray after college? The value prop is further compromised by a reduced chance of a big exit, so I have to think any new entrant in the field would have to be like my boyhood hero: Sparky Anderson.

As a kid who grew up playing 3-4 leagues of baseball annually (and grandfather who played AAA ball in the Tigers organization), I came to learn great respect for the longtime manager of the Cincinnati Reds and Detroit Tigers. Sparky was universally loved by his players, and is still the only guy who won the World Series in both the National and American leagues. He had great years and miserable years – all at least 162 games long, which is amazing when you consider the finesse required to ‘manage’ through that much change over that long of a time span. So how did Sparky do it? He absolutely loved the game.

So the question is: do you love the entrepreneur game? Chances are you’re not going to get rich quickly, you’ll work crazy hard for minimal pay and there are barbarians at every gate. If it were easy, every moron in the world would be chasing the startup dream. But they’re not. It’s takes a specific type of person to step out on the edge.

There’s a long-running debate on whether entrepreneurs are made – or can the skill set be taught. In fact, a TechDrawl reader emailed me over the weekend pointing me to Steve Blank’s blog for more debate on the topic. (You can watch the hour-long panel discussion here.) While folks like Jason Calacanis and Fred Wilson think it’s innate within a person, there’s another group represented by Vivek Wadhwa and others who believe entrepreneurship can be taught. It’s the classic nature versus nurture debate.

In this case, I side almost exclusively on the nature side. I fundamentally believe entrepreneurs are just wired differently than your standard employee of Big Company X. There’s a wildly increased pace of critical thinking, a willingness to risk everything based on a single product or service, and an incessant dreamer’s outlook on how the world should be. And yes, it’s a personality type. For me, the one exception is anyone with zero financial pressure – be that from a wildcard of a previous business (one which didn’t require the typical startup trials and tribulations, but generated lots o’ cash) or good old fashioned family money. When you’re not sweating the mortgage or kids’ college funds, it’s easy to turn-up the risk meter :-)

But back to baseball... The parallels between running a startup and managing through a 162-game Major League Baseball season are uncanny. Here are my Top 10:

1) Everyone starts out optimistic – imagining they have the perfect team (or product) assembled.

2) There’s a two-month period of practice before the season (business planning), and much of a team’s final trajectory is determined by how quickly they ‘get out of the gate’.

3) The duration of the season (or life of a company) is highly prone to streaks – where things run very well for a while, then run poorly.

4) Every organization has role players who must perform in their specialized function for the team to be a success.

5) Certain players (a shortstop or a junior sales rep) can break out – and radically improve the chance the team wins big.

6) Star players can be injured or have an off year (or take a job at your main competitor), therefore decreasing the potential of winning.

7) The manager is responsible for putting out the line-up card every game (the same way a great CEO sets the pace).

8) The team requires great leadership to steer through the ups and downs of 162 games (or to pivot a startup).

9) There’s a point about 2/3 of the way into the season where you make trades to improve your chances down the homestretch (like trading a junior marketing person for a commission sales person).

10) The ultimate prize is the World Series (or a big exit), which is a reality for only one of the 30 teams that compete.

And you can’t really talk baseball and startup parallels without covering how MLB owners are the angel investors of their ecosystem. (I’ll give VCs a pass on this one as they’re admitted professional money managers, which you might argue owners should be but they’re not.) Most owners come from very well off families and businesses (think the Busch family that owned the St. Louis Cardinals until 1995, or George W. Bush who bought the Texas Rangers in the mid 1980s). Across-the-board, they’re deeply committed to the franchise and oftentimes even plow their own money into the chase for greatness – to sign that one more free agent that could be the difference between playing in the World Series or finishing third in your division. Owners are also involved in a never-ending battle to improve the revenue, whether that be naming rights to a field or convincing local governments to help build bigger stadiums with more high-rent luxury boxes. But make no mistake; most are in it for the love of the game. Breaking even is nice, but not required.

So what if you could see the end of your career right now? And what if there were no World Series rings (or startup exits) in your future, would you still play the game? Would you still be an entrepreneur or an angel investor? Are you willing to play through the losses to get to that one big win? I for one, would love to see more folks like Sparky Anderson – and fewer professional money managers – involved in the startup game.

Ask yourself this simple question: are you the one to deliver Web 3.0 (or whatever euphemism you want to use) or are you just chasing a 10x RoR? If it’s the latter, I’m sure there are better chances for success elsewhere. If you’re here to play ball, welcome to game.

When Doves Whine

Sunday, 11 July 2010 05:50 Published in Entertainment

Early last week, I saw the now-famous Prince story roll through my Twitter stream. During a rare interview – this one with the UK’s Daily Mirror – his royal purpleness dropped his theories on the world:

 

“The Internet’s completely over. I don't see why I should give my new music to iTunes or anyone else. They won't pay me an advance for it and then they get angry when they can't get it. The Internet's like MTV. At one time MTV was hip and suddenly it became outdated. Anyway, all these computers and digital gadgets are no good. They just fill your head with numbers and that can't be good for you."

It’s official: Prince has become the old guy at the club. It’s a good thing he’s got maximum security around his 70,000 square foot Paisley Park complex in Minneapolis, or he’d definitely yell at the kids to get off his lawn. Oh, where to begin…

First off, listening to Prince bitch about the state of the music industry is like Warren Buffett complaining about Food Stamps – nice theoretical conversation, but not based in reality AT ALL. I’ve got a lot more pain in my heart for a 22-year-old trying to figure out how to scrape up the cash to dup 50 copies of their first EP. Today’s artists have already turned the proverbial corner on digital music, and understand the standard ways to bank (tour, merch, fan clubs, etc.) – with the best of them inking TV and commercial licensing deals. I’ll concede the industry is still whacked, but guess what: great talent still finds a way to break through and make money. Witness Jay-Z, John Mayer or Sugarland to name just a few. Hell, I own Purple Rain on DVD so I don’t wanna hear Prince complain…

Secondly, remind me how you help yourself by keeping your artistic creation out of the hands of your fans. Even if you don’t need the money, at least show some respect to those who enabled your current existence by buying your first 20 albums. (I’d bet the royalty streams are still pretty healthy – even from the deep catalog stuff.) Can you really be so successful (and rich) that you eventually believe that creating music is some type of ordained act? His thinly veiled point was he deserves millions of dollars to merely create the music – I guess he’s thinking an old school record company advance? Or a big fat check from a tabloid newspaper. I guess either one gets you paid upfront – which feels like a punk move for someone of his talent and fan base.

And clearly, I think you could make a pretty strong case that the ‘digital gadgets’ Prince blasts have done more to fill heads with music than with numbers. I normally don’t listen to spreadsheets on my iPhone, but my MacBook Pro does have that whole text-to-speech thingy I’ve never turned on. And the other artistic endeavors powered by ‘computers’ include music itself, digital photography, video production and about 50 more really cool innovations. So there you go Prince, take my money for 20 years and then whine when technology provides a way for me to carry it with me everyday. That seems like a winner of an argument.

So why does someone take a position like this? It’s easy: they’ve been so successful for so long, there’s no one in the entourage to keep him in check. And with that much cash and an odd streak to begin with, bingo: you got another Michael Jackson – rich as hell, surrounded by support staff whose income depends on whether they agree, and with no sense of the real world. It’s the exact same scenario with a LeBron James or any other star athlete. They’ve been worshipped since middle school, and there’s a point where you start believing your own PR. You always win, you never get caught, your people can make anything go away.  We only ever hear the stories when the system breaks down…

But here’s why I care: because Prince is an absolute beast of a musician and will go down in history as a leading voice of our time. For me, Prince is like Joe Cocker: I only want to listen to their music. I don’t want to watch Joe Cocker sing, and I don’t want to hear Prince talk. I beg you, o’ paisley’d one, please let your electric guitar do your talking. Enjoy what I would consider one of the Top 5 guitar solos of all-time (fast-forward to 3:30 if for some unknown reason you're not a Beatles or Tom Petty fan):

The more events I attended around town, the more entrepreneurs I meet. And the more entrepreneurs I meet, the more it becomes clear to me that someone is missing in almost every room: Atlanta’s Fortune 500 corporations. Other than the TAG/GRA Business Plan Finals, I can’t recall seeing anyone from Home Depot, Georgia Pacific, AT&T’s Wireless Group, Kimberly Clark, Coca-Cola, UPS, Turner or Cox anywhere about town. So why is that? Why is there little to no interaction between the biggest companies who need innovation to continue powering their businesses and those most suited to creating innovation?

And while I detest those who compare resumes, I’ll give the three-sentence version of mine to provide some context for my comments. I’ve spent 20 years in technology in Atlanta, always in interactive marketing but on both the agency and corporate side. My earliest agency run was technically PR, but we were really launching brands and companies into that newly created Internet thing. From there I spent just over five years inside UPS, then popped out into the big agency world with outfits like Digitas and Tribal DDB. I’ve literally seen all three sides of this fence: startups, corporate and agency. Okay, lineage defined. Now on to my theories on this problem, and how we solve it.

So why is there a complete disconnect between entrepreneurs and big companies? One of the main reasons is the source of innovation inside large companies. While some of the best have dedicated staff thinking about the future, most are awash with wide ranks of middle management trying to get promoted to the next level – which more often than not means incremental improvement, not blow-the-world-up ideas. And I have an entire theory about the source of real innovation in companies of more than 500 employees: unless your in the C-suite, the system only allows Big Ideas to come from outside consultants or agencies. The political capital required to push an idea through an entire management chain is absolutely more painful than when the Omnicom account guy convinces your boss’ boss that same idea would increase revenue and decrease cost-to-serve. And somehow the IBM sales guy always seems to be right there with an army of interactive consultants to staff up two more IT projects than your own resources can handle. My challenge to the Fortune 500 leaders is to isolate and cultivate the brightest among your ranks, and set them loose – particularly those 5-7 years experience. Why not encourage them to leave the fold to start companies in the same space (think Google’s mantra that engineers spend 10% of their time working on their own projects). Certainly a $150,000 bet on someone who knows your business inside-and-out is a smarter move than pounding dollars at some buzzword-crazed consultant.

A second reason for this disconnect is that most entrepreneurs aren’t considering these local companies when formulating new businesses. Why not start a company with a big-ass paying customer in mind? Granted there aren’t 3-4 huge success stories to make it really obvious, but why aren’t there more logistics startups in Atlanta? It’s not as if UPS hasn’t snapped-up players in every corner of the shipping and logistics markets – plus they even have a strategic investment fund. Again I ask, why aren’t smart engineers creating companies tailor-made for investment or purchase by Big Brown? And why are there no startup ecosystems surrounding Coca-Cola, Home Depot or Turner?

Let me give everyone a real-life example of Fortune 500 working with early-stage startups here in town. In early 2000, I was asked to define the corporate-wide policies and channel implementation of marketing email at UPS (yep, nothing existed before then). Neither the Bain or IBM guys had a group I could turn to, so I ran across a small startup in town that had done some great pro bono work for the Annie Casey Foundation. That 10-person company was called Silverpop. I worked many days, nights and weekends with Bill Nussey and his just-assembled management team to get the effort in-place ahead of our Teamsters contract negotiations. In the process, Silverpop won full delivery of customer email for UPS. It was a perfect example of leveraging an external subject matter expert, and Silverpop today employs more than 300 people in Atlanta. I got the industry’s sharpest minds, and Silverpop got themselves one hell of a reference client. The relationship still pays dividends for both companies today – more than 10 years later. This is a great example of a large corporation finding a small startup to execute on programs outside their core competencies. Why aren’t there 100 more stories like that?

A third reason for this disconnect is the ‘work-for-hire’ mentality most IT procurement managers take of technology that’s created externally. Again, I could wax at-length on the comedy of melding UPS and Silverpop from a contractual perspective, but those who find it funniest already know all the stories (Hint: think external security audits of hosting facilities). While there are some natural points of contention among entrepreneurs and companies, it seems there’s plenty of middle ground. If you’re on the corporate side, setup a strategic pool where the entrepreneur retains 15% of the licensing rights to their innovations. The reason for this is simple: the biggest consultants and agencies have a standard playbook – one that rehashes many of the same ideas over and over. And an entrepreneur, by nature, desires to create something completely different. For a great example, remember the Netflix Prize, where they challenged developers worldwide to improve their algorithm by 10%. Why settle for the IBM sales guy who’s been instructed to sell “cloud computing” this quarter when you could have the brightest entrepreneurial minds cranking on a solution? And if they do create the future of your industry and you’re scared about not owning 100%, just buy them and move on. Google does it all the time… And from an entrepreneur’s perspective, be prepared to run a couple projects as an outsourced development shop in order to prove your worth. By the way, this is a perfectly viable way to secure dollars for your own ventures – most large corporations are accustomed to paying well over $150/hour for external marketing and IT expertise. Not without some quid pro quo, but get in there and prove your value. And here the reality: 15% of something that has UPS or Kimberly Clark as a reference customer is probably more loot than almost any other idea you could take to market alone.

So the final question is how do we fix this? It starts with the two camps talking first. I know of a few experiments like Lunch 2.0, but we need to get serious about creating these relationships. This is a common debate around the TechDrawl Cave, and we’re interested in hearing everyone’s take on tactics. And speaking of tax credits, why not give state incentives to corporations who invest or simply spend money on local startups? And what about the role of organizations like GTRI and ATDC as honest brokers between entrepreneurs and Fortune 500 companies? And if I really think hard about it, give these organizations a matchmaking fee to help solve their budgetary issues. My primary point is there are lots of great ecosystems that simply aren’t working together.

So I challenge everyone reading this – regardless of whether you’re in Atlanta, Charlotte or Austin – what are you doing to connect startups with your town’s biggest companies? And for senior management inside these companies, what better way to improve your hometown economy than to prove a rising tide floats all boats? Everyone should care, but not enough do. Stop whining about the West Coast, and become part of the solution.

I've seen the future of GPS, and guess what: it ain’t Garmin, Magellan or TomTom. In fact, it doesn’t cost a penny and it runs on virtually every smartphone platform. Said simply, download Waze now.

 

Back in 2008 – just as I picked-up my snappy new iPhone 3G – I wrote a blog post pondering whether the new GPS features would seriously threaten Garmin. My net analysis was the technology was there, but the software wasn’t. What I learned later was the barrier wasn’t coding at all – it’s the base maps that are only available for licensing from select vendors (like NAVTEQ who powers Garmin devices) at prohibitive prices. Now granted, Google is taking a good run at commoditizing mapping, but the applications thus far are mostly just digital mashups. But that’s where the sheer genius of Waze comes in – and it’s a global play the likes of which we’ve not seen in a long time.

Waze began life in Tel Aviv, Israel as a project called Freemap. The founders set out to define a new segment of GPS applications featuring real-time driving information and user-generated maps. Think social media and gaming meet GPS. And because they were mapping countries like Israel, solid base maps weren’t available. So how do you solve for this? It’s crowdsourcing, dummy! With more than 230,000 users in Israel alone, Waze now owns the most comprehensive mapping data for the country. They also have Waze loose in the rest of the world, including Italy where the community mapped virtually every major city in the country within 10 days! And clearly when you add this type of user-generated maps to the Google effort, defending your high-dollar mapping business gets harder and harder every day. Check out this video to see a user-created view of map gestation over a six month time period in Eastern Europe – crazy stuff!

waze_screenWaze’s inherent power in creating the maps is also what drives its up-to-the-second relevance – the community. By leveraging the latest in gaming and healthy competition trends in order to incent user-generated content, Waze has set the new standard for a GPS application in the digital age. The days of buying a separate unit for $200, and paying $80/year for new map data should now be relegated to your grandparents. Perhaps the greatest sales channel for Garmin will become Lillian Vernon or QVC? There’s not enough room here to delve into the hundreds of killer features in Waze, but you can see lots of them in the video below featuring Waze’s DiAnn Eisnor.

And let’s not overlook the way Waze has brought their product to-market. Leaders like Twitter, Foursquare and Facebook have the luxury to approach location-based technology as a slightly slower pace than the average three-person startup. But the reality is the landscape is already littered with location-based plays – with probably another 150% in the pipeline given the space is so hot. And each company will face the same question: How do I monetize quickly to drive faster development?

Standard thinking is sell the app for $4.99 in the various mobile marketplaces or include ads and hope someone wants to buy. Waze has gone about it all 1998-style: they took a Series A round in March 2008 from Blue Run Ventures, Magma Venture Partners and Vertex Venture Capital. And they’ve delivered a killer app that’s free to consumers and has no advertising – or said more simply, absolutely zero barriers to consumer adoption. Again, pure genius.

So what does the future look like for Waze? Certainly, they’ll always be getting better as the community becomes larger and more active. Imagine an Israel-like density in the US, and the sheer beast of an application that would create. I can tell you I’ve not found any roads in my semi-rural home zip code that aren’t base-level mapped, and the point-earning opportunities are plentiful! There’s also a back-end data play here as well given Waze is creating an entirely new flavor of navigable maps that are overlaid with massive UGC. The mind can run a bit wild on how that content might find itself into Augmented Reality apps or even in-car technologies. The bottom line is Waze may be the coolest application of crowdsourced information I’ve seen in very long time.

So munch on Wazers! My map can't wait to get smarter...

Number 1: Joe Hamm’s 'Online To Offline'

Tuesday, 06 July 2010 14:59 Published in Startups

Our #1 video features Joe Hamm from Mobilization Labs, who was the organizer for Social Media Day Atlanta 2010 – or you may know him by his alternate title: Chief Ringleader. Joe reiterates the most important point of the whole evening: that in-person relationships are the Gold Standard. Social media can be a great way to find like-mined people and keep up with all the latest trends, but nothing will ever replace an hour-long mentoring session between entrepreneurs or a great dinner among friends. Using technology as an enabler to human communication is perhaps the best application of the beast. <Step down from soapbox.>

And to proactively diffuse all the buzzword monitors, yes I know the word ‘Transparency’ appeared nowhere in the Top 11 list. Maybe that’s proof we’re past the buzziest of words, and phrases like ‘ROI’ and ‘metrics’ are on their way into vogue. Here's our complete coverage of the event:

Social Media Day Rolls Atlanta Style

There Ain’t No Party Like A Social Media Party

Mashable Pulls A Hallmark: June 30 Is Now Social Media Day

The 11 Phrases You’ll Hear At A Social Media Meetup

Number 10: Engage

Number 9: Have A Voice

Number 8: Authentic

Number 7: Stakeholders

Number 6: Vision

Number 5: Buzz

Number 4: Word Of Mouth

Number 3: Optimize

Number 2: Less Hardcore Dance-y Stuff

Enjoy the video interview below:

Number 2: Less Hardcore Dance-y Stuff

Monday, 05 July 2010 16:03 Published in Startups

Our #2 video features Kimberly Turner of Regator, who guest DJ'ed the evening. I’m officially adding that phrase to the social media lexicon, so find a way to work it in!  Enjoy the video interview below:

 

Number 3: Optimize

Monday, 05 July 2010 15:46 Published in Startups

Our #3 video features Tessa Horehled of Think Interactive and Drive A Faster Car. If you’ve spent any time in social media about town, then you probably already know Tessa… Enjoy the video interview below:

Number 4: Word Of Mouth

Monday, 05 July 2010 15:37 Published in Startups

Our #4 video features Andy Meeks of Scoutmob, one of Atlanta’s hottest B2C startups. If you’ve got an iPhone, do yourself a favor and download their app now! Enjoy the video interview below:

Page 8 of 19